The sex discrimiation case against WM has been certified as a class action of 1.6 million women:
In a statement, attorneys for the six plaintiffs said the case was the largest civil rights class action ever certified against a private employer.The statement contains the following:
The Judge noted that in their case, �plaintiffs present largely uncontested descriptive statistics which show that women working at Wal-Mart stores are paid less than men in every region, that pay disparities exist in most job categories, that the salary gap widens over time, that women take longer to enter management positions, and that the higher one looks in the organization the lower the percentage of women.�The Judge did not say whether the gap between men and women was smaller or larger than the one in other companies known not to have engaged in sex discrimination. Also:
The Court in reviewing all of the evidence found that together the evidence presented by the plaintiffs, �raises an inference that Wal-Mart engages in discriminatory practices in compensation and promotion that affect all plaintiffs in a common manner.�In other words, a practice of promoting the most aggressive ladder-climbers is illegal discrimination against women if the most aggressive ladder-climbers are men, even if this is not discriminating against any specific woman for being a woman.
My question is, if women are a sure-fire bet to be paid less for the same work, why does WM employ so many men?
UPDATE: Wal-Mart already insisted on its innocence:
In anticipation of the ruling, Wal-Mart spokeswoman Mona Williams told The Associated Press on Tuesday that the Bentonville, Ark.-based company will appeal and is confident in its contention that it does not discriminate against women employees.
Posted by Kevin on June, 22 2004 at 10:21 AM
